Why Perry Can't Win

[The Rabbi]

That's fine, JoeB, it is your opinion, and that is all it is. If it comforts you, good for you.

No, guy, I forward an argument by presenting facts.

And lacking a counter-argument, you say...

"welll...welll...well... that's your OPINION!"

If you want to impress me, make a counter argument.

Tell me why it was a good thing that God drowned every baby in the world.

That would impress the hell out of me, or make me laugh hysterically, but it won't be as boring and tedious as your usual lame tactics.

Why dont you start by telling us why it was a bad thing?

 

[JoeB131]

So which theology, ideology or culture does not have a 2000 year history of war, murder etc?

And your screed conveniently ignores the 2000 year history of good works inspired by religion.

What good works?

Let's be honest, the Dark Ages were the first "Faith Based Initative". Christianity took over Europe and technology regressed by about 500 years.

If anything, religion has been a drag on progress. When most of the world was figuring out slavery was a terrible thing, who went back to the bible for validation? The slaveholders, who found a whole bunch of verses supporting the notion that slaves should be damned happy about it.

Religion gives people permission to engage in unacceptable acts. "Holy War". Think about that notion for a moment. What about a war could ever be holy?

Why dont you start by telling us why it was a bad thing?

You're kidding, right?

Drowning every baby in the world would be considered a bad thing by most people.

Now, to a point, God slaughters a whole lot of babies in the bible. A part of this callous attitude is that they had an infant mortality rate of something like 50%, and people didn't get that attached to babies.

But God essentially says he doesn't like the way people are, I'm sorry I made them, so I'm going to put them in a sack like a bunch of unwanted kittens and throw them in a river. We'd throw someone in prison for that.

 

[The Rabbi]

Babies die every day from disease or accidents. Why doesn't that bother you?

You really think all of Western civilization is not worthwhile?

 

[JakeStarkey]

JoeB is simply unhappy with God is all. That's his right to be so, and his reponsibility for it.

 

[The Rabbi]

JoeB is simply unhappy with God is all. That's his right to be so, and his reponsibility for it.

No, he's unhappy with himself and thinks he's taking it out on Gd.
He can do whatever he wants. Doesn't make it right though.

 

[NGSamson]

Guy, I've already told you I don't spellcheck a message board, and even a Funditard like you knew what I was talking about...

But, hey, like I said, people pay me to write their resumes, and most of them get jobs after I do so.

Which has nothing to do with the question you refuse to answer.

Why do you worship a baby-drowning God?

Any one who pays you to write a resume must work for McDonald's. They are not known to be to demanding. Smart guys like you should be able to come up with better lies. And if you dont care, why point it out ? Oh, because that's all you had, got it. And you do spell check now. No matter what anyone says, you will bang on your same old shit. WHIIIIIICKED, WHIIIIIICKED. Your mind is already made up. No run along. you look stupid.

 

[JoeB131]

Guy, I've already told you I don't spellcheck a message board, and even a Funditard like you knew what I was talking about...

But, hey, like I said, people pay me to write their resumes, and most of them get jobs after I do so.

Which has nothing to do with the question you refuse to answer.

Why do you worship a baby-drowning God?

Any one who pays you to write a resume must work for McDonald's. They are not known to be to demanding. Smart guys like you should be able to come up with better lies. And if you dont care, why point it out ? Oh, because that's all you had, got it. And you do spell check now. No matter what anyone says, you will bang on your same old shit. WHIIIIIICKED, WHIIIIIICKED. Your mind is already made up. No run along. you look stupid.

Actually, I've seen college educated people who can't write resumes for shit. Because really, writing is something the colleges have emphasized a lot less since I went in the 1980's. Saw one lady who wrote a resume that was so bad she got fired from her current job because she complained about it and they saw it on Craig's list. Most people aren't good at writing resumes.

Duly noted that you still can't answer why you worship a God who drowns babies...

I mean, I must be absolutely shattering your sorry world view, man. You worship a sociopath. Thankfully, a fictional sociopath, but a sociopath nonetheless.

 

[JoeB131]

Babies die every day from disease or accidents. Why doesn't that bother you?

You really think all of Western civilization is not worthwhile?

I think western civilization is overrated. Of course, looking about at our crazy slaughterhouse of a world, I wonder when this civilization stuff is going to start.

Yes, I am bothered when babies die from anything. I would hope you would be, too.

That wasn't my point, though, which you avoided.

My point is that God's solution to man's "wickedness" was to drown everyone. Everyone. Every last person in the world except Noah and his family, and they basically started sinning again the moment they got off the boat, so all that slaughter and nothing really worthwhile accomplished. Mankind was still evil and sinful and as Sister Mary Butch said "WIIIIIIIIICKED".

So, yeah, I have to wonder what the moral of that story is, exactly. I mean, that sounds like Obama level incompetence. The Stimulus was a rousing success compared to that story.

 

[NGSamson]

Guy, I've already told you I don't spellcheck a message board, and even a Funditard like you knew what I was talking about...

But, hey, like I said, people pay me to write their resumes, and most of them get jobs after I do so.

Which has nothing to do with the question you refuse to answer.

Why do you worship a baby-drowning God?

Any one who pays you to write a resume must work for McDonald's. They are not known to be to demanding. Smart guys like you should be able to come up with better lies. And if you dont care, why point it out ? Oh, because that's all you had, got it. And you do spell check now. No matter what anyone says, you will bang on your same old shit. WHIIIIIICKED, WHIIIIIICKED. Your mind is already made up. No run along. you look stupid.

Actually, I've seen college educated people who can't write resumes for shit. Because really, writing is something the colleges have emphasized a lot less since I went in the 1980's. Saw one lady who wrote a resume that was so bad she got fired from her current job because she complained about it and they saw it on Craig's list. Most people aren't good at writing resumes.

Duly noted that you still can't answer why you worship a God who drowns babies...

I mean, I must be absolutely shattering your sorry world view, man. You worship a sociopath. Thankfully, a fictional sociopath, but a sociopath nonetheless.

You aren't telling the truth. You cant spell candidate, yet you get paid to write resumes ? In your mind I worship a God who drowns babies, but thats only in YOUR mind. Sociopath beats a liar 90% of the time.

 

[JoeB131]

Well, you know, the word candidate never comes up on resumes, and when it does, the spell check catches it if I get it wrong.

Yup, got a website and everything... with testimonials. Won't give you a link to it because it has my real name and location on it... and frankly, I've kind of concluded your some kind of serious whackjob.

God drowned babies in Genesis 6-9. It's in the bible. You've spent four pages and a day avoiding my simple question of why it was totally cool for God to do that...

Because you can't.

Now, I've answered all of your idiotic questions.

 

[NGSamson]

Well, you know, the word candidate never comes up on resumes, and when it does, the spell check catches it if I get it wrong.

Yup, got a website and everything... with testimonials. Won't give you a link to it because it has my real name and location on it... and frankly, I've kind of concluded your some kind of serious whackjob.

God drowned babies in Genesis 6-9. It's in the bible. You've spent four pages and a day avoiding my simple question of why it was totally cool for God to do that...

Because you can't.

Now, I've answered all of your idiotic questions.

Yeah, resume writing. Will see that published with the best works of all the greatest authors. No you haven't, but you keep coming back to rant.

 

[The Rabbi]

Babies die every day from disease or accidents. Why doesn't that bother you?

You really think all of Western civilization is not worthwhile?

I think western civilization is overrated. Of course, looking about at our crazy slaughterhouse of a world, I wonder when this civilization stuff is going to start.

Yes, I am bothered when babies die from anything. I would hope you would be, too.

That wasn't my point, though, which you avoided.

My point is that God's solution to man's "wickedness" was to drown everyone. Everyone. Every last person in the world except Noah and his family, and they basically started sinning again the moment they got off the boat, so all that slaughter and nothing really worthwhile accomplished. Mankind was still evil and sinful and as Sister Mary Butch said "WIIIIIIIIICKED".

So, yeah, I have to wonder what the moral of that story is, exactly. I mean, that sounds like Obama level incompetence. The Stimulus was a rousing success compared to that story.

Mankind became evil and corrupted. And not just mankind either. All living things. Things were certainly better after that.
I still don't know what's bothering you about it.

 

[edjax1952]

The GOP / Tea Party / Libertarians have a real quandry on their hands with this guy. I really liked him when we lived in Sugar Land, TX but we were pretty insulated from the poor / lower-middle-class there. I have to admit, I was not paying attention to a lot that was going on. I thought all was fine.

So the biggest debacle the Conservs have had recently (in the eyes of everyone but themselves) was the debt ceiling. Polls ranged anywhere from 65% - 78% of people thinking the GOP handled it disastrously. Doesn't matter if they were right or had a point, elections are won based on perception - and the perception was overwhelmingly poor. This was one of the few areas in which Obama (although he too had poor ratings) came out looking WAY better than the GOP. So debt is a key issue.
What's Perry's record on debt? Oops. What will the Dem sound bite be? "A vote for Perry is just like a vote for bringing George W. Bush back to the White House!" Oops.
Then there are those things about his highway and giving the government land and power? Oops. Big Government guy eh? More Bushlike.
Owned by Big Oil? Of course. More Bushlike.

But here's what's worse for him. Subliminal Psychology. The stuff we don't even notice, that effects our decision making.
I voted for Bush (the good one, not the idiot). I was floored when he lost! He was the first incumbant president in history to decisively win a war that the whole nation was behind - and then lose re-election.
I used to lecture on Pyschological Profiling at USD and decided to make him a case study. Bush was a long-time spook. One of the things you learn in the biz, is misdirectional body language. Shaking your head no, while you say the word "yes", for example. Bush was a master of this and it killed him. In one speech he held his thumb and forefinger an inch apart. What does that mean to our subconscious? Small. What was he actually saying at the time? "The Hispanic community is very important to me." What was the message sent to Hispanic voters? He's lying.
In another speech, he held his hands together and then motioned them outwards. What does that mean? Pushing apart. What did he say? "I'm here to bring us together. To work as a non-partisan." Again, the subconscious message that he was lying.
Now I think he actually meant those things but he had so much training in misdirectional body language, he couldn't help himself. So whether or not he was genuine, at the subconcious level, he wasn't perceived as genuine. That cost him.
So now we come to Perry. I've been watching and listening. There are three things that make impact: Visual appearance, Vocal tones and patterns, Choice of words.
Perry dresses and moves a lot like Bush (the idiot, not the good one). He's very "down home" and Texan. Even likes cowboy boots. This is bad.
Perry's vocal tones and patterns are a LOT like W. I heard him on the radio and thought it actually was W for a second. He speaks slowly, with a Texan drawl. He pauses a lot. He laughs just a bit, here and there. He speaks in a tone that is mostly light-hearted and then varies to anywhere from serious to mildly angered. This is all classic W.
Finaly, Perry's choice of words come straight from the Texas Handbook of Politics. It works wonders at home and worked wonders for W in both elections. And if it wasn't for W, it might make a fantastic contrast to Obama. But because of the spectre of The False Texan Conservative of Elections Past, it will be a killer for him.
Add to that, the actual, legitmate challenges he faces with issues such as spending and he's cooked. It's not that people would move toward Obama, it's that hoardes of Independents, Moderates (yes, there is a difference!) and others would move away from Perry.
So like I said, I liked Perry when I lived in Texas. I think Obama sucks. But for reasons beyond the recognizable, Perry would almost definitely lose a general election. A lot of people will "just have a bad feeling" about him and not even be sure why. Remember, most people don't research candidates, couldn't tell you if the 2nd amendment has to do with guns or ice cream, and vote based on the impressions they get from 30 second sound bites. It won't be hard for the Dems to gather sound bites that make Perry seem like a virtual clone of W.

Ther have been several elections where I felt that both candidates were insincere and I did not trust either of them to be a great leader. I always choose the one I dislike the least. It would take a real goofball to run against Obama to make me dislike him more than Obamba.

When Obama was running for president, I said "If it seems like a socialist, acts like a socialist, and talks like a socialist, it is probably a socialist. My apprehensions were well founded.

We just need to get him out of office, period. He has actively and beligerently gone forward with his big government agenda in spite of any protests from congressional members or the general public. I do believe that he thinks he is doing the world (Not America) a great justice with his actions. I believe he opposes American exceptionalism and thinks we should put ourselves inline with being a nation among nations instead of being a world leader of nations.

Even if we get another inexperienced dreamer of his proportion in there, he could not be more off target for the welfare of our individual liberties and financial well being than Obama has been. I think Obama will hold the record for that position for a while to come.

I pray daily that a good candidtae will be brought to the polls but
I intend to vote against Obama no matter who his opposition is no matter what his body language is, or whether he is a good public speaker or not. That is a really sad state of affairs but I believe it is where we are today.

 

[NGSamson]

The GOP / Tea Party / Libertarians have a real quandry on their hands with this guy. I really liked him when we lived in Sugar Land, TX but we were pretty insulated from the poor / lower-middle-class there. I have to admit, I was not paying attention to a lot that was going on. I thought all was fine.

So the biggest debacle the Conservs have had recently (in the eyes of everyone but themselves) was the debt ceiling. Polls ranged anywhere from 65% - 78% of people thinking the GOP handled it disastrously. Doesn't matter if they were right or had a point, elections are won based on perception - and the perception was overwhelmingly poor. This was one of the few areas in which Obama (although he too had poor ratings) came out looking WAY better than the GOP. So debt is a key issue.
What's Perry's record on debt? Oops. What will the Dem sound bite be? "A vote for Perry is just like a vote for bringing George W. Bush back to the White House!" Oops.
Then there are those things about his highway and giving the government land and power? Oops. Big Government guy eh? More Bushlike.
Owned by Big Oil? Of course. More Bushlike.

But here's what's worse for him. Subliminal Psychology. The stuff we don't even notice, that effects our decision making.
I voted for Bush (the good one, not the idiot). I was floored when he lost! He was the first incumbant president in history to decisively win a war that the whole nation was behind - and then lose re-election.
I used to lecture on Pyschological Profiling at USD and decided to make him a case study. Bush was a long-time spook. One of the things you learn in the biz, is misdirectional body language. Shaking your head no, while you say the word "yes", for example. Bush was a master of this and it killed him. In one speech he held his thumb and forefinger an inch apart. What does that mean to our subconscious? Small. What was he actually saying at the time? "The Hispanic community is very important to me." What was the message sent to Hispanic voters? He's lying.
In another speech, he held his hands together and then motioned them outwards. What does that mean? Pushing apart. What did he say? "I'm here to bring us together. To work as a non-partisan." Again, the subconscious message that he was lying.
Now I think he actually meant those things but he had so much training in misdirectional body language, he couldn't help himself. So whether or not he was genuine, at the subconcious level, he wasn't perceived as genuine. That cost him.
So now we come to Perry. I've been watching and listening. There are three things that make impact: Visual appearance, Vocal tones and patterns, Choice of words.
Perry dresses and moves a lot like Bush (the idiot, not the good one). He's very "down home" and Texan. Even likes cowboy boots. This is bad.
Perry's vocal tones and patterns are a LOT like W. I heard him on the radio and thought it actually was W for a second. He speaks slowly, with a Texan drawl. He pauses a lot. He laughs just a bit, here and there. He speaks in a tone that is mostly light-hearted and then varies to anywhere from serious to mildly angered. This is all classic W.
Finaly, Perry's choice of words come straight from the Texas Handbook of Politics. It works wonders at home and worked wonders for W in both elections. And if it wasn't for W, it might make a fantastic contrast to Obama. But because of the spectre of The False Texan Conservative of Elections Past, it will be a killer for him.
Add to that, the actual, legitmate challenges he faces with issues such as spending and he's cooked. It's not that people would move toward Obama, it's that hoardes of Independents, Moderates (yes, there is a difference!) and others would move away from Perry.
So like I said, I liked Perry when I lived in Texas. I think Obama sucks. But for reasons beyond the recognizable, Perry would almost definitely lose a general election. A lot of people will "just have a bad feeling" about him and not even be sure why. Remember, most people don't research candidates, couldn't tell you if the 2nd amendment has to do with guns or ice cream, and vote based on the impressions they get from 30 second sound bites. It won't be hard for the Dems to gather sound bites that make Perry seem like a virtual clone of W.

Ther have been several elections where I felt that both candidates were insincere and I did not trust either of them to be a great leader. I always choose the one I dislike the least. It would take a real goofball to run against Obama to make me dislike him more than Obamba.

When Obama was running for president, I said "If it seems like a socialist, acts like a socialist, and talks like a socialist, it is probably a socialist. My apprehensions were well founded.

We just need to get him out of office, period. He has actively and beligerently gone forward with his big government agenda in spite of any protests from congressional members or the general public. I do believe that he thinks he is doing the world (Not America) a great justice with his actions. I believe he opposes American exceptionalism and thinks we should put ourselves inline with being a nation among nations instead of being a world leader of nations.

Even if we get another inexperienced dreamer of his proportion in there, he could not be more off target for the welfare of our individual liberties and financial well being than Obama has been. I think Obama will hold the record for that position for a while to come.

I pray daily that a good candidtae will be brought to the polls but
I intend to vote against Obama no matter who his opposition is no matter what his body language is, or whether he is a good public speaker or not. That is a really sad state of affairs but I believe it is where we are today.

Big fat douche or giant turd sandwich. Its a hell of a choice.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Stalin went to religious seminary.

JoeB, you don't like religion and you distrust the religious. That's fine, that's your opinion, and that's all it is.

I dislike religion because they have a 2000 year history of racism, slavery, genocide, torture, murder, instigating wars, oppressing science and reason...

In short, I dislike them for reasons any sane, reasonable person should dislike them. because they're evil. They do evil things and they cloak it in virtue by waiving around the bible. And when you read the truly evil stuff that's in the bible, you kind of understand why.

Take Hitler. The Catholic Church loved Hitler. Pius XII was known as "Hitler's Pope". Then Germany lost the war, and suddenly, the church is pretty much trying to scrub itself of all association with the Axis. (People like to try to forget this, but yeah, that's what happened.)

But honestly, the bible is full of cases where God or his servents commit genocide, so I'm having a hard time to see why religious people had a problem with it, exactly. The whole book of Judges is one genocide after another.

Saul is abandoned by God because he didn't commit "complete" genocide against the Amakelites (he killed them, but kept their cattle!)

In short, the only reason Christianity persists is because "Christians" like Samson are ignorant about what is actually in the Bible, and don't think much about the awful stories they do know.

So which theology, ideology or culture does not have a 2000 year history of war, murder etc?

And your screed conveniently ignores the 2000 year history of good works inspired by religion.

Seems to me that HUMANITY has a history of war, murder, slavery, etc., and religion mostly has a history of existing at the same time. Yeah, it hasn't always done the best job of fighting against the worst of human nature, but overall Christianity (and other religions as well) has done more to resist and improve on those impulses than anything else.

 

[NGSamson]

I dislike religion because they have a 2000 year history of racism, slavery, genocide, torture, murder, instigating wars, oppressing science and reason...

In short, I dislike them for reasons any sane, reasonable person should dislike them. because they're evil. They do evil things and they cloak it in virtue by waiving around the bible. And when you read the truly evil stuff that's in the bible, you kind of understand why.

Take Hitler. The Catholic Church loved Hitler. Pius XII was known as "Hitler's Pope". Then Germany lost the war, and suddenly, the church is pretty much trying to scrub itself of all association with the Axis. (People like to try to forget this, but yeah, that's what happened.)

But honestly, the bible is full of cases where God or his servents commit genocide, so I'm having a hard time to see why religious people had a problem with it, exactly. The whole book of Judges is one genocide after another.

Saul is abandoned by God because he didn't commit "complete" genocide against the Amakelites (he killed them, but kept their cattle!)

In short, the only reason Christianity persists is because "Christians" like Samson are ignorant about what is actually in the Bible, and don't think much about the awful stories they do know.

So which theology, ideology or culture does not have a 2000 year history of war, murder etc?

And your screed conveniently ignores the 2000 year history of good works inspired by religion.

Seems to me that HUMANITY has a history of war, murder, slavery, etc., and religion mostly has a history of existing at the same time. Yeah, it hasn't always done the best job of fighting against the worst of human nature, but overall Christianity (and other religions as well) has done more to resist and improve on those impulses than anything else.

True all. Politics has killed more people (even babies) then religion.

 

[Cecilie1200]

So which theology, ideology or culture does not have a 2000 year history of war, murder etc?

And your screed conveniently ignores the 2000 year history of good works inspired by religion.

Seems to me that HUMANITY has a history of war, murder, slavery, etc., and religion mostly has a history of existing at the same time. Yeah, it hasn't always done the best job of fighting against the worst of human nature, but overall Christianity (and other religions as well) has done more to resist and improve on those impulses than anything else.

True all. Politics has killed more people (even babies) then religion.

The truth is that virtually all fights between humans are about power, whatever excuses they cloak themselves in and hide behind. Politics is just a more naked, open struggle for power than most.

 

[edjax1952]

Seems to me that HUMANITY has a history of war, murder, slavery, etc., and religion mostly has a history of existing at the same time. Yeah, it hasn't always done the best job of fighting against the worst of human nature, but overall Christianity (and other religions as well) has done more to resist and improve on those impulses than anything else.

True all. Politics has killed more people (even babies) then religion.

The truth is that virtually all fights between humans are about power, whatever excuses they cloak themselves in and hide behind. Politics is just a more naked, open struggle for power than most.

I thought this thread was about if Perry could win in 2012?

 

[NGSamson]

True all. Politics has killed more people (even babies) then religion.

The truth is that virtually all fights between humans are about power, whatever excuses they cloak themselves in and hide behind. Politics is just a more naked, open struggle for power than most.

I thought this thread was about if Perry could win in 2012?

Thats ware it started but got high jacked by a Mormon hating pseudo intellectual.

 

[JoeB131]

Mankind became evil and corrupted. And not just mankind either. All living things. Things were certainly better after that.
I still don't know what's bothering you about it.

Gee, sorry, not seeing it. All living things? really? all the puppies and kitties, too.

Every last fricking one of them was evil?

Wow, doesn't that make God like, completely incompetent? I mean for an omnipotent creator. He creates everything and within a few generations, it all becomes corrupt, and has to be destroyed. Really?

I mean, honestly, that sounds kind of psychopathic. I mean Andrea Yates psychopathic.